| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | vladimir(at)sycore(dot)org |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Why? |
| Date: | 2005-01-20 00:36:42 |
| Message-ID: | 1056.1106181402@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Vladimir S. Petukhov" <vladimir(at)sycore(dot)org> writes:
> select * from nets;
> name | note | net
> ------+------+---------------
> | | 172.16.0.0/16
> (1 row)
> select * from nets where net >>= '172.16.4.0/8';
> name | note | net
> ------+------+-----
> (0 rows)
Are you confusing >>= with <<= perhaps? The >>= operator tests
ip_bits(a1) <= ip_bits(a2)
&& bitncmp(ip_addr(a1), ip_addr(a2), ip_bits(a1)) == 0
which looks reasonable enough to me. By that logic a /16 net
can never be a supernet of a /8 net.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Uwe C. Schroeder | 2005-01-20 00:48:13 | Re: need an advice on running Database |
| Previous Message | Dann Corbit | 2005-01-20 00:28:11 | Re: Unique Index |